Revision of David Harris vs. Kenny Demens from August 6th, 2012 at 4:23 PM

So the way I like to learn things is to start an argument with someone who knows more than I do about that subject and see which things I think are terribly wrong. Today Magnus put an interesting question to the board about the current MGoTake on Kenny Demens, which thread I am bumping up to the front page to encourage further discussion (note the nods of agreement in the comments are for Magnus, not me). His original post:

I've seen many references to this in recent times, including when I was reading HTTV. There seems to be some sentiment around here that Kenny Demens is better than Obi Ezeh but he won't make anyone forget about David Harris. I'm kind of confused why people are down on Demens in that way. He's not Ray Lewis, but David Harris wasn't Ray Lewis, either.

Those are pretty similar statistics, and while Harris did more in the turnover department, I'm not sure why people are insisting that David Harris was so much better. Demens still has a year to get to that level. He may or may not get there, but I don't think it's really a fair argument to compare the two careers right now.

Opportunity knocks.

Harris is special to Brian because he was the first great player uncovered in UFR. He's special to me because when I crossed that line between being someone who knows Michigan football and is truly informed obsessed about Michigan football, I began going around telling people that David Harris (not Henne, Hart, Manningham or Long) was the most important guy on the team. In both cases that was in 2005, about the same time in his career that Demens was getting his unit dinged (vs. MSU et al.) for not being reactive enough. This has resulted in a bit of a bias on these pages from Brian and those principally informed by Brian to speak of Harris in near-Woodsonian terms. Whether you regard that as a weakness in our coverage, it fortunately leaves plenty of room for Demens to be both "worse than David Harris" and "a damn good Big Ten linebacker."

Here's the part of Brian's summation on Demens from HTTV that I am almost certain Magnus is responding to:

We got some clarity in 2011, when Demens was just okay. While he led the team in tackles, he managed just two TFLs against running plays. He barely beat blocks and was such a mediocre blitzer that Greg Mattison started playing him at nose tackle so he could send Mike Martin at the quarterback. On the plus side of the ledger, Demens was a surpisingly high-quality cover guy, sticking with players well down seams he didn't have much business covering.

First let's clarify that nobody's suggesting Demens is an average of 45s. The Unofficial MGoBlog Harris-Ezeh Scale of Linebackeritude...

That is a comedown from post-2010, when this site fell in love with Demens for being not-Ezeh and because most of his struggles were schematically blameable on GERG (plus the threat of a Dr. Vorax the Stuffed Beaver facewash if he did something good). He is a pretty good tackler. He stands up well to blocks. And he is one of the guys who helped make us stout in short situations last year. We like him.

Harris was a player. He led the team in tackles, making a fair number of them near or behind the line of scrimmage. He was tasked with spying Drew Stanton during the Michigan State game and flashed his speed against Penn State when he tracked down Derrick F-ing Williams on an end around. His UFR number was +8 that game, a monster. Though Harris tailed off towards the end of the year, he's established himself as one of the Big Ten's better linebackers and certainly the best Michigan has.

Over the course of his senior season Harris went from a budding star that bloggers were into before it was cool, to a player of the decade who could diagnose the blocking assignments of a given play before people in the huddle did:

The difference I find is the instincts. Harris was great because he could read a play, make his decision, and shoot to where he needed to be. Having rewatched the late '90s games with new eyes I can see Dhani Jones had this to set him apart as well. Kovacs is the obvious modern example.

It's clear by the rating above that I'm a Demens believer. I liked what I saw last year and I've seen MLBs who are pretty good to compare him to. David Harris, for one. He's not Harris but I think Demens is closer to him than Ezeh already. He just has a knack for getting to where the play is going. Though his coverage still needs some work he was decently effective in short zones last year.

There's no direct post-sophomore comparison for Harris because he had a knee injury that took two seasons to return from. Before that, freshman versions of Harris were the recipients of an a-normal amount of positive chatter. Spring chatter is just that and not worth putting that much stock into, however there's too many old copies of The Wolverine gushing about him to discount entirely. As soon as Harris was healthy he displaced the returning starter (McClintock) and never came off the field.

Demens before his RS junior year is equally hard to pin down. There was some trouble for which the entirety of Demen's culpability essentially came down to "is bad at choosing roommates." When he dropped behind Ezeh and position switching Moundros early his RS sophomore year the expectations were downgraded, only to be rekindled when it turned out this was just the work of the nefarious Dr. Vorax.

As for their respective junior seasons, the basis of the claim that Demens=Harris is based in the tackling stats. Because the team can face radically different numbers of plays I like to use % of team tackles for this; though it doesn't change the point Magnus was making:

Harris

Tac

Ast

Tot

Demens

Tac

Ast

Tot

2005 Season

52

36

88

2011 Season

49

45

94

TEAM 2005

539

269

808

TEAM 2011

481

380

861

% of 2005

9.6%

13.4%

10.9%

% of 2011

10.2%

11.8%

10.9%

On the surface this seems to support your assertion that their respective RS Jr seasons were pretty comparable. Harris had a greater % of his tackles solo because the team was less into gang-tackling.

My memory said Michigan faced more passing offenses in 2005 than this year. However the stats say that 2005 and 2011 were almost identical in number of live plays:

Live Defensive Plays

2005

2011

Opp. Rushing Attempts

430

429

Opp. Pass Completions

223

221

TOTAL

653

650

The biggest difference seems to be the cornerbacks and LaMarr Woodley made the tackles that Kovacs and T.Gordon took for 2011. If you take the view that tackles missed by linebackers go to the safeties then:

2005

2011

Name

GP

Tac

Ast

Name

GP

Tac

Ast

W. Barringer

10

29

14

Jordan Kovacs

12

51

24

Brandent Englemon

11

26

16

Thomas Gordon

13

41

26

Jamar Adams

12

21

6

Courtney Avery

13

17

9

B. Harrison

12

15

9

Carvin Johnson

8

9

5

TOTALS

x

91

45

TOTALS

x

118

64

(I included Courtney Avery because some of Harrison's season was at nickel and it's hard to separate that.)

There's also a moderate difference in rushing yards/attempt between the seasons that you have to imagine the leading tackler had something to do with: Opponents in 2005 were held to 3.8 YPA; in 2011 it was 4.0 YPA. However this is a very flimsy statistical case. Magnus is correct that the numbers do not show a major difference between Demens and Harris's junior seasons.

For that we have to go to the realm of the individual games and plays. Here's the UFR comparison of their respective junior seasons:

David Harris:

Opponent

+

T

Notes

Notre Dame

5

1

4

Night and day from McClintock.

Eastern Michigan

5

0

5

Reading and reacting in the short zone.

Wisconsin

4

3

1

Reading and reacting in the short zone.

Michigan State

6

0

0

Playing very, very well. Entrusted with spying Stanton all day; shows the faith they have in him.

Minnesota

8

2

6

Well, we've got one linebacker.

Penn State

9

1

8

Biggest scrub to star transformation since...?

Northwestern

4

1

3

Unbelievably deep drops in coverage.

Iowa

3

3

0

Worst game since he became a starter. Still did okay.

Ohio State

2

0

2

Kenny Demens:

Opponent

+

-

T

Notes

Western Michigan

7.5

5

2.5

Kind of a rough start but played in odd conditions.

Notre Dame

13

4.5

8.5

Twelve tackles and few errors.

Eastern Michigan

3.5

4.5

-1

Slow to diagnose some things.

San Diego State

9.5

2.5

7

Not sure what to do with his Howard-esque coverage but I liked it.

Minnesota

4.5

2.5

2

Not many plays even got to him.

Northwestern

5.5

9.5

-4

Did not get outside even on speed options.

Michigan State

4.5

6.5

-2

Michigan's linebackers are not nearly as reactive as MSU/ND, even Northwestern, and it costs them.

Purdue

3

3

0

Not much got to him thanks to Martin.

Iowa

10

6

4

Stuck Coker cold a half yard from a critical third down conversion. I be like dang.

Illinois

7.5

3.5

4

Second consecutive solid game. Pretty good in coverage.

Nebraska

9.5

5.5

4

Three straight +4s. Surprisingly good in coverage for MLB.

Ohio State

5.5

4

1.5

Ate some blocks.

TOTALS:

Harris 2005: +29 in nine games (+3.2/game)

Demens 2011: +26.5 in twelve games (+2.2/game)

Now I realize UFR has changed a bit since then and that opportunities might be different and etc. etc. etc. etc. this is not scientific at all. What I'm really going by is the record in the comments. So those numbers probably don't mean anything.

What does things are the notes. In Demens you see "slow to diagnose some things" and "Michigan's linebackers are not nearly as reactive as MSU/ND, even Northwestern, and it costs them," and "Ate some blocks." Is it a weakness? I'm sure the coaching carousel Demens has had in his career is a big part of that. I'm also sure that among the most important attributes for a defensive player, perhaps even more important than his size or his speed or his tackling technique (though all matter a lot), is how many micro-seconds it takes him to react correctly to the play. In this Harris as a junior was outstanding, and Demens as a junior was "area for improvement."

Does this constitute a low ceiling for Demens? If you put a gun to my head: yes, I'd say he's RVB to David Harris's Mike Martin.

I for 1 appreciate it. I had no idea Demons was as close to David Harris, stat wise, his junior year. Pretty cool. I would never take the time to look that kind of info up, so I like having this type of contribution. And even when I disagree, it doesn't mean I don't value the discussion.

How is it less fair? It's equally fair... You just use the information available to make your best prediction. Now you can say that there isn't as much information available, which is obviously true, but that doesn't mean it's not fair. All high school kids have the ability to put tape out there, and the fact of the matter is that's what they are evalutated on. It's a level playing field.

Telling people what you really think, if you are qualified (which I think Magnus is, since he is a coach) cannot possibly be a bad thing. Magnus has also always prefaced that he is simply a coach and a fan, not a professional evaluator. The net effect of having another educated opinion on recruiting is definitely a positive, especially since he doesn't cast everything in a positive light just to get pageviews since he isn't getting paid for doing it.

Should we expect every recruit to not quit the team/pan out/stay out of trouble and be the next Woodson? Let's just face reality instead of deluding ourselves.

I must be completely lost on why people are all over Magnus all of the sudden? He was talking about a David Harris and Kenny Demens comparison. What does him watching tape on a high school player have to do with this comparison? Absolutely nothing. I appreciate what Magnus contributes to the MGO community. If you don't like it, then maybe you should review all the game film on high school players and give your opinion. FWIW, Demens is somewhat of a beast IMO. I'm excited to see how he has improved this offseason.

Agreed. I have never commented much and overall am a fairly new member but the amount of shit he gets is ridiculous. He gives his opinion, one that I like because he is how I would want a coach to be! He doesn't need to say how great players are because he is trying to get interviews from those same players like most evaluators.

The amount of banter on this site is getting out of hand and needs to stop. i recommend either a new points system or bringing back the old "popular" system.

He is underrated by most of us. Demens really improved last year in my mind. He was much more physical at the point of attack. His coverage skills really improved over the year especially crossing routes and his zone drops.

His second year with Mattison and co. I see more consistency and doing better against spread teams. I am really excited to see him play against Air Force. LB's and CB's can have a lot fun against option teams.

I firmly submit he could be a 2nd rounder in the right circumstances, most likely 3-4 rounder.

1. The 2006 defense was loaded with NFL level talent making it harder to come by tackles.

2. Stats don't show where those tackles were made or how they were made. Harris was almost always in the right place and a major reason why team rushed for almost nothing week after week.

3. Stats don't show blown assignments. Demens missed his assignment on numerous occasions or got blocked clean out of the play plenty of times. Harris was a machine and even if couldn't make the tackle he held his spot better than most college LB's I have seen. He almost never made major mistakes and controlled the defense.

David Harris is a pro bowl LB for a reason and one of the most underrated players ever to wear a Michigan uniform. Demens career isn't over yet but it will take an enormous leap for him to get to Harris' level, in my opinion.

You could argue that other good players means they are taking tackles away from the LB, but you could also argue that having a better defense around you doing their jobs (e.g. line occupying blockers) puts the LB in a better position to make the tackle.

I'm not sure which is necessarily true, but I can see it either way, especially since my understanding is that most defenses are meant to free up LBs to make the tackle.

1. I could argue that Demens had to make more tackles than he should have because of less talent around him, so maybe he had to run farther or maybe he couldn't make some tackles on the interior because Jake Ryan couldn't hold the edge. I don't see this as a viable argument.

2. Some stats show where those tackles were made. Demens had more sacks, meaning he took down the QB behind the line. They had the same number of tackles for loss.

3. Do you have a UFR that tells you how many times Harris blew an assignment during his junior season? He may have been a "machine" and "held his spot better," but are you remembering a junior David Harris or a senior David Harris?

I read all the '05 UFRs. By my recollection, Harris and Branch were the breakout players on that defense, obviously so. Pat Massey was perhaps the worst defensive tackle in the UFR era and that was deeply problematic for that defense, particularly for Harris.

I also wrote in the '08 HTTV specifically about the level of talent Harris represented and how difficult replacing him would be. I scouted a number of games from '05 and '06 specifically to write the thing.

Now, the difference between what I know about football now and then is pretty great. But I would be very surprised if Demens measured up to Harris. Neither his instincts nor his athleticism are as good Harris to my eye. Harris' ability to avoid blocks remains as good as I've seen since I've been tracking M football.

Demens is not a bad football player, but David Harris was remarkable and his talent was as obvious as you'd guess from a player drafted as high as he was and who's since gone on to such accolades.

Obviously, statistics don't tell the whole story. But it's not like the 3-tech was stellar in 2011. And besides that, the NT and SDE have more of an impact on the MLB than the 3-tech does. Plays run toward the 3-tech/WDE are going to be more in the area of the WILL (a.k.a. Desmond Morgan), although obviously it's going to overlap a bit.

I went back and re-read some of the UFRs and I think it's fair to say I overstated my case re: Harris' instincts somewhat. But not at all the case against Massey. Brian makes it abundantly clear that he was the biggest culprit on that defense, with injury and Burgess as runners up.

Harris was a player. He led the team in tackles, making a fair number of them near or behind the line of scrimmage. He was tasked with spying Drew Stanton during the Michigan State game and flashed his speed against Penn State when he tracked down Derrick F-ing Williamson an end around. His UFR number was +8 that game, a monster. Though Harris tailed off towards the end of the year, he's established himself as one of the Big Ten's better linebackers and certainly the best Michigan has.

(Oh snap mgoblogspot nostalgia flashback.) The last sentence is pretty much the claim that I'd make. I'm not sure I'd say the same for Demens last season or not, but I lean towards "not". They are decidedly different athletes. Harris ran a 4.6 at the combine and he was evidently just about that fast as a junior. From an instincts perspective, Harris showed flashes that I don't think Demens matched.

This is also enlightening re: your use of tackle numbers. From the PSU '05 UFR:

Why does Mason lead the team in tackles? Because he can't tackle. Is this causing a spiritual awakening in anyone? Someone should be getting enlightened around about... now. What the hell am I talking about? Well, Penn State made a concerted effort to throw short routes against him, relying on their ability to break his tackles to pick up significant yards. This worked. Wait until you see the chart. I think this has been happening with increasng frequency as the year moves along and more and more film of Mason lunging ineffectually at people dashing past him become available. Mason is facing a ton of short routes run at him by teams looking for easy yards. He's pretty good in coverage but I think he's another reason our outside containment on running plays has ranged from abominable to "don't look at the Ark" this year.

That is, making tackles is not the same thing as being good at tackling. Teams run plays in order to exploit the worst defenders. Burgess, Massey and the non-Hall secondary members struggled to make tackles.

You have tackle totals. You don't have opportunities to make a tackle. Without the appropriate denominator, we can't normalize the totals appropriately and we can't really be sure what they mean. Scouting data is far more valuble in these situations and what we have here are in favor of Harris. Similarly, what we know about Harris' subsequent career absolutely should color our perception of his '05, adjusted for aging. Athletes across most sports seem to peak from 25-29, improving somewhat until then and declining thereafter.

So just because we don't know what Demens will do doesn't mean we shouldn't assume he won't ever be--or has been--as good as Harris. So few athletes perform to Harris' level that assuming that Demens hasn't been as good until he proves otherwise is sound. At least that's what I'm pretty sure a Bayesian would say.

I see what you're saying in regard to cornerbacks, but I don't think it applies so much when talking about middle linebackers. The ball must be run left, right, or up the middle. I know you're making a general point, but the cases are different.

It's fine to assume that Demens won't be as good, but the individual players' statistics don't back you up. You're sort of relying on philosophy and probability rather than what has happened with the subjects in question.

Overall, I get what you're saying. And you're basically admitting that you don't really have an argument outside of "I've seen them both play, and Harris was better." That's perfectly fine and an honest response, and I mean no offense by putting it that way. But when it comes down to it, I think a lot of people who might say "Demens is nowhere near David Harris" are speaking more out of nostalgia for Harris than any true insight into how their talents compare.

And yes, that last sentence is just as presumptuous as the statement I'm questioning. I realize that.

EDIT: By the way, Colin, I always appreciate your comments. You're a very thoughtful contributor, even if we don't quite see eye to eye.

I just deleted a whole bunch of paragraphs that just rehashed the whole thing and it added annoyingly little clarity. Instead, I summarize the issue like so:

You feel you're working with what feels like concrete data so you're not likely to be swayed by what seems like a lot of guesswork. I'd argue the opposite is actually true given what we collectively know for certain: I'm working with more concrete (but non-numerical) data. Given your prior assumptions, my approach wasn't going to be very convincing. If I really wanted to convince you, I'd delve into the variance of tackling numbers and that just doesn't seem that appealing.

But, if it interests you, the data is online at bentley. If tackles per game correlate significantly year to year and correspond to draft status, I might be swayed. It's a complex undertaking, so feel free to say fuck that noise like I did.

In re: #1, I think the quality of the 2006 defense, as a whole, could be looked at from the other side of the coin, i.e., there were so many great players on that defense, that Harris looked better than he might have been simply by the squad being so talented. I am not saying I ascribe to this idea, just that it could be looked at that way. Further, it brings up what Phil brought up -- Kenny's game is a product of being on the worst defense in Michigan history.

All that said, I agree with you Ari that Harris was far superior to Kenny thus far -- and agree with your points about the specifics of his game/talents. I wish Kenny had been able to learn under Mattison since he was a freshman. I think he's a heck of an instinctive LB, but his game lacks the polish that having top quality coaching would have developed. However, I expect big things from him this season despite his limitations. If there is a DC out there knows how to get the most out of an LB, while not asking him to do things that he cannot do, it is Mattison.

And I should have posted my feelings on that point in the first post. While you can argue that better complimenting players help the defense as a whole I believe that when the majority of the players around you are bad, decent to good players tend to make a LOT of plays simply because nobody else is there to make them. Case in point is Jordan Kovacs. Kovacs is a good player but do you think he would be about to break the all-time tackle record for a DB at Michigan if he didn't play on some terrible defenses? I don't think so.

What if the D-line was more productive last year because we have 3 coaches who love linemen. English was a secondary guy from what I remember. Mattison loves the line if I remember correctly, and we all know Hoke was a d-line coach and we have Montgomery. I would imagine the d-line gets more in depth time nowadays. I do agree that Demens has been quietly very productive and he compares favorably with Harris.

Also, it's hard for anyone to argue against Demens by lauding Harris' NFL production. Demens hasn't made it that far yet, so we have no baseline to compare them on. With the comparisons we can make, the statistical edge has to go to Demens. In 5 years we can all come back and rehash this after we see if Demens has been productive in the NFL.

Yeah, that's an insane amount. I think people really overestimate the talent of Gabe Watson, Alan Branch, and Terrance Taylor. The standard for nose tackle play at Michigan over the last 20 years is Mike Martin, in my opinion.

serious question..did we have any 5 tech d-lineman to compare to Martin?... I dont think we used true nose tackles in the past..and it seems that more gap responsibility would equal more tackes for a good player. Also i feel like teams pushed the run against us alot ove the last few years

NYJ teammates vote him MVP of the Defense every year even with Revis Island. Demens is no where near David in comparing both Junior campaigns and therefor Kenny Skeptic will exist until he does something about it. No bigger year than 2012 for him, obviously.

If things go as planned Kenny should have a special sr year. I dont think people are down on him, they're just saying he more than likely won't be an All-American like David. Also let's not forget that one is currently a top 5 inside linebacker in the NFL and the other may never stick to an NFL roster...

It may be a case of nostalgia causing us to remember the good parts of the past at the expense of the bad, but to me, David Harris was the epitome of an NCAA linebacker who could read and react, shed blockers, and attack the ball-carrier with speed.

I think Demens is a good player too, but Lloyd Carr called David Harris the best middle linebacker he ever coached.

Demens had a great line in front of him last year and, as you noted, some inexperienced LBs along side. This season, the LBs are going to need to stay clean and get to the ball, since the D line will probably not make all the plays they did last year. I hope he makes us all forget about David Harris, because we'll need him to play his best this year as the D line matures. Looking forward to ending the chatter and watching some football!

They will need unbelievable play from the back seven this year IMO because of the huge losses on the line. A best case scenario sees Will Campbell having a monster year and the defense being a fast machine. More realistically they will probably struggle against the run but hopefully be solid against spread teams or teams that run more finesse offenses.

People tend to blend their memories in general, particularly as time goes on. I think the two main effects, are that people are thinking of Harris' successful NFL career and breakout senior season, and blending that with his solid junior season. Most fans can't recall the aptitude of player X in a given year several years ago (for example, it took looking back at some old game summaries for me to remember that I was really down on RVB his sophomore year, since I have such a good impression of him now).

Seems like there's a strong argument that both Harris and Demens had B+ junior years. Magnus -- you seem to think that Demens is in line for a breakout year, which is why you're comparing him to Harris. What do you see that makes you thnk this? Isn't it most likely that Demens more or less stays Demens (particularly without Martin or RVB in front of him), and continues to put up solid but unspectaular numbers.

I don't really think he's primed for a breakout year. I just don't see the evidence for people to say "He's nowhere close to what David Harris was" and I've seen that comment (or similar ones) pretty often lately. Well, at this point in his career, David Harris hadn't shown the ability to be The David Harris, either.

I do think Demens will improve with a second year in this system. Whether that means improving to 100 tackles and sticking around 5 TFLs or whether it's staying in the 90-ish range for tackles but making 14 TFLs, I don't know. But I'm not necessarily expecting a true "breakout" year. To me that breakout already occurred somewhat. Going from Honorable Mention All-Big Ten to, say, All-Big Ten doesn't seem to me like a monumental leap. It just seems like a standard level of improvement.

Joking aside, Harris was one of those guys who, to put it in Brian's words "always tackled people and never didn't tackle anyone." He never had any ESPN top 10 plays, but you don't need to do that as a middle linebacker.

Part of the Harris glamour is magnified by his illustrious NFL career thus far. Another part of this glamour is the romanticization of the 2006 season (there's projection of senior David Harris onto all-years David Harris).

Personally, I think Demens is in for a big year, especially given the state of the D-line. He needs an interception at some point.

Defensive coordinators are the difference in Demens talent. You got to have the right coaches to make a kid grow and you need a good defensive coordinator to put you in the best position to make a play. His stats reflect that. Imagine if we had Mike Martin for another 3 yrs.

You conclude by saying it is not fair to compare the two careers. Ironically that statement follows a comparison of just junior seasons which implies that you think it is legitimate to compare just junior seasons. Seems a bit inconsistent. Instead of saying it is not fair to compare, I think you meant it is not fair to compare Harris's full career to Demen's career to date.